Immigration at the Border
Some States “Just Say No” to Harmful Immigration Enforcement Laws
If Arizona had its own television show, the warning “don’t try this at home” would appear after every commercial break. (Cut to tumbleweeds and Arizona businesses pulling their pockets inside out) This week, some states—like Virginia, South Dakota and New Hampshire—actually heeded that warning and rejected a host of enforcement measures targeting undocumented immigrants. States like Oregon, Colorado and Maryland are even introducing progressive, common sense immigration proposals that benefit their state. That is, of course, not to say that other states like Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas and Arizona aren’t still pursing harmful enforcement legislation, but they do so in full light of the social and economic consequences—consequences for which Arizona and other states are still paying. Read More
President’s 2012 Budget Reveals Conflicted Priorities on Immigration
The President’s proposed FY 2012 budget for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illustrates the Obama administration’s conflicted priorities when it comes to immigration. On the one hand, the budget increases funding for worthy causes such as immigrant integration, alternatives to detention, and civil-liberties oversight of enforcement programs. On the other hand, these funding increases are dwarfed by the size of the budget for border and interior immigration enforcement. In other words, despite some good intentions, and an effort to balance the impact of enforcement programs, ultimately the budget reflects a commitment to the enforcement-without-reform policies that have failed so miserably over the past two decades. Read More
Isn’t It About Time We Thought Realistically About Border Security?
Old thinking on border security was on grand display today during a House Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee hearing titled “Securing our Borders – Operational Control and the Path Forward.” Congress’ seemingly insatiable appetite for border enforcement does not seem to be assuaged by the reality at the border. Despite the record number of resources added to border enforcement over the past decade, the number of undocumented immigrants has risen to record levels. It has also created an unintended but real boon for the criminal cartels that now have a steady flow of migrants to smuggle into the U.S. But there are substantive and realistic efforts Congress can make to help secure the border. Read More
Progressive Immigration Measures Pick Up Steam at the State Level
By SUMAN RAGHUNATHAN, PROGRESSIVE STATES NETWORK As the list of state business leaders, law enforcement, and conservative lawmakers who realize that anti-immigrant efforts are costly, misguided, and destructive to state economies continues to grow, a number of state elected officials are putting their weight behind progressive, solutions-based approaches to immigration policy. A group of progressive state elected officials affiliated with Progressive States Network—State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy, with members in 34 states and counting—have been at the forefront of advancing pragmatic and progressive state approaches to immigration which expand opportunities for all residents, both immigrant and native-born, while strengthening communities and state economies. Read More
What’s in Your Wallet? Fiscal Notes Give States Pause Over Enforcement Laws
As states continue to crowd the immigration enforcement debate with rhetoric and white noise, other states are getting down to brass tacks. On Monday, Utah’s Legislative Fiscal Analysts office hung an $11 million price tag around HB 70, Utah’s immigration law requiring local law enforcement to check the citizenship status of those they suspect are in the country illegally. That’s a steep price to pay for a law Arizona has already proven will cost your state jobs, legal fees and tourism revenue. Kentucky also recently crunched the numbers and found their SB1070-style law (SB 6) would cost the Bluegrass state a whopping $40 million per year. As many states face budget deficits in 2011, lawmakers might be asking their constituents the same question as those Capitol One commercials, “What’s in your wallet?” Read More
Mandatory E-Verify is Not All It’s Cracked Up to Be
Today, the House Immigration Subcommittee held a hearing on the E-Verify system, a tool to help employers electronically verify that their employees have permission to work in the United States. Although E-Verify remains largely voluntary—except for federal contractors, employers in certain states that have made it mandatory, and a few other exceptions—some members of Congress and immigration restrictionists have decided that expanding E-Verify and making it mandatory will flush unauthorized workers out of the workforce, create jobs for unemployed U.S. citizens, and resolve our immigration problems. While everyone agrees that high unemployment levels must be addressed, simplistic measures like mandating E-Verify are not going to open up jobs for millions of unemployed workers. Read More
E-Verify: Burdens Businesses and Displaces U.S. Workers
Washington D.C. – Today, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its second hearing of the new session. Ironically, the hearing was titled “E-Verify – Preserving Jobs for American Workers.” Some members of Congress persist in their belief that expanding E-Verify and making it mandatory is a magic-bullet solution to our immigration… Read More
Mandatory E-Verify without Legalization Would Hamper Economic Recovery and Cost U.S. Workers Jobs
Since 1986, controlling illegal immigration by regulating who is entitled to work in the United States has been a key component of U.S. immigration policy. The ritual of showing proof of one’s identity and work authorization and filling out an I-9 form is part of every new hire’s paperwork haze. Read More
Deeper into the Shadows
Before the onset of the Great Recession, immigrant labor was cited as a boom to the U.S. economy. In towns and cities across the country, immigrant labor—documented or otherwise—filled positions in growing businesses and industries where demand outpaced the supply of native-born workers. Since the onset of the economic downturn in 2008 and the rise in U.S. unemployment, some analysts and politicians—looking for a convenient scapegoat—have turned on that immigrant workforce and their employers, arguing that deporting eight million undocumented immigrant workers will create eight million new jobs for the native-born. This over-simplified equation ignores the complicated and inter-dependent roles that immigrants play in our economy. A 2010 study by the Fiscal Policy Institute on the economic contributions of immigrants in the 25 largest metropolitan areas in the United States makes the point well: The results were clear: immigrants contribute to the economy in direct relation to their share of the population. In the 25 largest metropolitan areas combined, immigrants make up 20 percent of the population and are responsible for 20 percent of economic output. Together, these metro areas comprise 42 percent of the total population of the country, 66 percent of all immigrants, and half of the country’s total Gross Domestic Product. Read More
Some States Applying Brakes to Legislation Denying Citizenship to U.S.-Born Children
Yesterday, a panel in South Dakota’s legislature voted to halt legislation aimed at denying citizenship to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. South Dakota’s bill—and others like it—propose measures which challenge the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that, with very few exceptions, all persons born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens, regardless of the immigration status of their parents. While conservative lawmakers continue to introduce bills challenging the birthright citizenship clause, other states—like Arizona and Montana—are joining South Dakota's lead in deciding whether to move these bills forward. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
